0
Research Papers: Contact Mechanics

A Computational Study on the Influence of Surface Roughness Lay Directionality on Micropitting of Lubricated Point Contacts

[+] Author and Article Information
Sheng Li

Wright State University,
3640 Colonel Glenn Highway,
Dayton, OH 45435
e-mail: sheng.li@wright.edu

Contributed by the Tribology Division of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF TRIBOLOGY. Manuscript received July 13, 2014; final manuscript received November 12, 2014; published online December 12, 2014. Assoc. Editor: Dong Zhu.

J. Tribol 137(2), 021401 (Apr 01, 2015) (10 pages) Paper No: TRIB-14-1159; doi: 10.1115/1.4029165 History: Received July 13, 2014; Revised November 12, 2014; Online December 12, 2014

This study focuses on the influence of roughness lay directionality on micropit crack formation, using a computational approach. A mixed lubrication model is implemented to find the surface tractions, which are used in a stress model to compute the near surface stress concentrations. With the stress amplitudes and means determined, the crack formation lives are assessed according to a fatigue criterion. It is found when the roughness lays of the two surface are parallel to the rolling direction and are out-of-phase, the resulted micropitting area percentage is minimum. The most severe micropitting activity is observed on the surface whose roughness lay is parallel to the rolling direction, while the roughness lay of its counterpart is normal to the rolling direction.

FIGURES IN THIS ARTICLE
<>
Copyright © 2015 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Predicted (a) σx, (b  σy, (c) σz, (d) σxy, (e) σyz, and (f) σxz fields at the depth of 0.5 μm below the roughness height in the ball for case I of Fig. 2

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Contour plot of crack nucleation life distributions along (a) the plane of y=0 and (b) the surface layer of z=S1, for a near surface volume of 1.6 mm (x direction) by 0.3 mm (y direction) by 10 μm (z direction) for case I of Fig. 2

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Predicted probability density distribution of the crack nucleation life for a near surface volume of 1.6 mm (x direction) by 0.3 mm (y direction) by 10 μm (z direction) for cases (a) I, (b) II, (c) III, (d) IV, (e) V1, and (f) V2 of Fig. 2

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Predicted growth of micropitting area percentage for a near surface volume of 1.6 mm (x direction) by 0.3 mm (y direction) by 10 μm (z direction) for case (a) I, (b) II, (c) III, (d) IV, (e) V1, and (f) V2 of Fig. 2

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Predicted (c) σx, (d  σy, (e) σz, and (f) σxy fields along the plane of y=0 in the ball under the surface tractions of (a) normal pressure and (b) tangential shear for case VI of Fig. 2. In ((c)–(f)), the upper black curves represent the mating roughness profiles of surface 2.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Predicted (c) σx, (d  σy, (e) σz, and (f) σxy fields along the plane of y=0 in the ball under the surface tractions of (a) normal pressure and (b) tangential shear for case VII of Fig. 2. In ((c)–(f)), the upper black curves represent the mating roughness profiles of surface 2.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Predicted (a) probability density distribution of the crack nucleation life, and (b) growth of micropitting area percentage for a near surface volume of 1.6 mm (x direction) by 0.3 mm (y direction) by 10 μm (z direction) for case VI (first row) and case VII (second row) of Fig. 2

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

Comparisons of micropitting area percentage at different contact cycles between cases I and VII of Fig. 2

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Definition of roughness lay direction angle αi for surface i (i=1,2)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Roughness lay direction combinations of the ball-on-plane contact. 1out-of-phase; 2in-phase.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Predicted (c) σx, (d) σy, (e) σz, and (f) σxy fields along the plane of y=0 in the ball under the surface tractions of (a) normal pressure and (b) tangential shear for case I of Fig. 2. In ((c)–(f)), the upper black curves represent the mating roughness profiles of surface 2.

Tables

Errata

Discussions

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In